Backflip: Antarctic peninsula, posterchild of Polar disaster, has been cooling not warming

The “fastest warming place” on Planet Earth wasn’t warming.

A new Antarctic study wipes out 20 years of panic about the West Antarctic Peninsula. All these years while people were crying about penguins, it turns out that the place was cooling rather than warming. Mankind has emitting a third of all its “CO2-pollution” ever from 1998, and there was “no discernible” effect on Antarctica. Indeed, the study quietly finds that even the bigger longer warming that has happened in the last century was not “unprecedented” in the last 2000 years.

In the last decade as this cooling trend was happening in the real world – in the media, the same spot was being described as “one of the fastest warming places on Earth”:

And this sort of news has been going on for years. This was “big deal” once-in-2000 year type stuff:

UK scientists say parts of Antarctica have recently been warming much faster than most of the rest of the Earth. They believe the warming is probably without parallel for nearly two thousand years. – BBC, 2001

But the news in 2016 was a bit of a bomb, prone to being misinterpreted, so the PR Team was pre-armed with excuses, from the first line of the scientific abstract which pretty much says that the peninsula still was one of the fastest warming places on Earth (if you look at warming from 1950 and ignore the last 20 years the study is studying). Great opening line. The abstract also mentions that the Antarctic peninsula is only 1% of the Antarctic (though no one seems to mention that when it was melting).

The cooling is natural and temporary (Hey, how do they know? They know because the models which didn’t predict the cooling are still predictingit will warm).

“The study does not suggest that global warming has been halted…” (because it would not get published in Nature if they did).

It’s just a coincidence that global temperatures “paused” during the same years – this has nothing to do with the “haitus”. (Methinks someone is still hurting from skeptics mentioning “the pause”.)

Here’s a goodie: “It hasn’t cooled nearly as much as it had warmed before,” Steig said. (Like 20-year-trends only mattered before 1998. After that, who cares?)

Trite excuses make subheader status: “Long-term changes have year-to-year variability: researcher” (Like that’s news? No one seems to put that in a sub-heading when it’s a warm year. Is the aim here just to bore people into not reading the article?)

Distractions make subheader status: This news about cooling is not important — what really matters is ____ (insert anything else)____. Eg. The real threat is ocean warming: Leeds researcher

So glaciers could still be melting down this neck of the woods, but there might be natural causes for that too. Likewise oceans may be warming around here as well, but then I don’t suppose anyone at the BBC or ABC will mention the hot magma underfoot.

…

All those past stories that told us manmade emissions were destroying Antarctica — forget them. We don’t know what the cause is:

Prof Nerilie Abram, at the Australian National University, said: “For a remote place like Antarctica, where climate measurements are especially short and those year-to-year swings in climate are very large, our records really aren’t long enough yet to see the full picture of human-caused climate change.”

Shame they didn’t mention that twenty years ago.

Perhaps they could speak up about the researchers who are making a fuss about other noisy, short data series? Like these ones: Shattered records show climate change is an emergency today, scientists warn.

It’s important never to be surprised

Scientists get shocked, astonished and amazed at events that are not even as bad as their models predicted. But when things are the opposite of what the models said, these are completely… expected:

Prof Andrew Shepherd, at the University of Leeds, said: “It’s completely unsurprising that in any long-term temperature record there will be a decade of measurements that buck the trend. There are few scientists left who believe that atmospheric warming will be the main cause of Antarctic [ice] instability over the next century.

The warming that models projected, Was flawed, as the skeptics expected, With Antarctica cooling, The warmists were fooling, With data which must be corrected.

Irrespective of the complexities of climate change and the difficulties in understanding it, the media doesn’t seemed to have worked out the profound effect of natural volcanic activity. Yes, lava melts ice, volcanoes emit billions of tonnes of “greenhouse gases” and volcanic clouds blots out the sun as well as stopping jet engines. Ever heard of Krakatao?

Yesterday, it was all about the warmest July temperatures ever on our ABC, and the encroaching seas on the NSW beaches due to the increasing amount of unusual “highs” and the NE wind patterns, all due to climate change.

As usual, when was their “ever”. But last night I commented on an earlier thread that right now our temp is something like 10 degrees above the average for this hour of this day. Still is at 5:30 am this morning, after having been 5.7 above average for the last 5 days. It looks even bigger when the average for this month is 7.8.

As for Stewart Elliot’s tiny flame of optimism. A headline in this morning’s Oz : “Fifield asks ABC to explain Q&A”.

The subject wasn’t AGW, but for the ABC this is seismic. Government calling the ABC to account? Watch for what comes next.

Comment re Robert O. Last light on the weather report on ABC TV News, NSW, the weatherman told us that the Moruya Heads weather station had recorded a temperature that was the highest for 90 years. This was delivered with the usual foreboding sense that ‘this is getting serious – all part of the relentless climb of temperatures’. I am sure that hundreds and hundreds of viewers could draw the conclusion that things are getting bad and the temperature at Moruya Heads is getting hotter and hotter all the time.

But exactly what is the conclusion that one can draw from this statistic? Surely it’s not that temperatures are relentlessly climbing. What the statistic actually tells us is that there was a hotter record 90 years ago. It tells us that it has taken 90 years for the temperature to get back to where it was 90 years ago.

I just invite people to listen very carefully when presented with information such as the ABC weather man gave us last night. Critical listening skills are important.

Depends which data they are using. At the Pilot Station, Tmax was reported as 24.9 degC on 22nd July. Days greater than 24 degC are in July 1975 (24.4) and July 1926 (25.6 (back-transformned from Fahrenheit, which leads to a slight precision error)).

At the Moruya Airport on 22 July, Tmax was 25.7 and is usually higher than at the Pilot Station. The problem with AP data is that:

Due to eddies off the runway and so-on, the automatic weather station, recording in a small Stevenson screen produces randomly-high numbers on warm days. (The AWS is located on the western side of the airport; cooling breezes are from the east.)

Data from the start of the record in October 1999 are in whole degrees until September 2010.

Back to the Pilot Station, the absolute highest temperature per year (from 1910) shows no trend. No trends either month-by-month. I don’t think it is evidence that we are heading to the cooker.

You are absolutely right. Words have power. Words are the stuff of Magic. Skilled orators can use words that create spells that can change the opinions of an audience, and in some cases change the whole tide of history.

Hitler was a successful orator, because the words he used touched on the aspirations of his audiences, and conveyed hope, and gave the German people a sense of destiny.

But if the audience questions the words used; if they are skeptical of the message being delivered, and look for what is not being said, and are cynical regarding why it has been omitted, then the spell can be broken.

It just needs little boys and girls like us, to ask why the Emperor is not wearing any clothes.

There are other problems. The AWS stations read higher than someone going out every hour because they pick up short spikes. These were probably not even picked up by min/max thermometers. It gets worse when you’re gobsmacked that the max the previous day was 20°C when it was quite chilly. From a few days ago and I didn’t take a screen shot, sorry.
Adelaide (Kent Town)
19/ 02:30pm 18.0
19/ 02:00pm 20.0
19/ 01:30pm 20.0
19/ 01:00pm 19.0
19/ 12:30pm 18.1

An automated weather station taking a reading every minute gets a 1 in 10 000 half-hour values at _.0 around the maximum that seemed too high. Strange as if there is a second day of exactly the same maximum temperature in the old records, one is considered a mistake and not included in the average.

If you believe NASA Gistemp, decades long cooling is nothing new to Antarctica. The expert scientists have managed to determine that the frozen continent was cooling rapidly between 1880 and 1930, offsetting the rapid natural warming in the Arctic from 1910 to the 1940s. They manage to achieve these estimates despite there being a no weather stations located on Antarctica until the mid-1950s. The highly erratic estimates before 1950 seem uncannily like the weather data from the exposed Base Orcadas, which lies North of the Antarctic circle. I have done a comparison here.

There is a geological equivalent about 40 years ago. A well-respected Professor of Geology (at an Indian university) had an exemplary record of publishing eye-catching exploration data on fossil finds. Many peer-reviewed papers greatly influencing the data record were attributed to him.

Eventually, he was caught in serial fabrication. The geological database in his area of “expertise” has been irretrievably damaged and he himself could not remember all the cheating he had carried out.

In a paper published today in Scientific Reports, the researchers project that approximately 30 percent of current Adélie colonies may be in decline by 2060 and approximately 60 percent may be in decline by 2099.”

That’s absolutely bitter. More than half of the penguins will be dead by 2099. In earlier times they benefitted from climate warming, but today heat is threatening to wipe them out. How has this come to be? The press release continues:

It is only in recent decades that we know Adélie penguins population declines are associated with warming, which suggests that many regions of Antarctica have warmed too much and that further warming is no longer positive for the species,” said the paper’s lead author Megan Cimino, who earned her doctoral degree at UD in May.”
&
When one looks more closely at the University of Delaware paper, the tricks the penguin researches are using quickly becomes clear.
For assessing the danger, a middle of the pack climate model scenario was not used.
No, instead the absolute most grim model by the name of RCP 8.5 was used.
It just could not be worse.
It’s like being sure you’ll have a car accident on the way to work today.

You send them of to visit some nice zoo somewhere, where they can eat as much fish as they like, and they still keep on turning up in Antartica making complete and utter fools of all of the nice climate scientists who were going to play a little nature trick (gidday Phil) by pretending they had become extinct.

Never trust a bird that can’t fly in the air (flying underwater is also not natural, ask a cormorant – no don’t ask a cormorant, they are not the best example – try asking a sparrow – 97% of sparrows agree that they can’t catch fish underwater). There, that should do it.

Well 298 town sparrows who infested our patio when the wild Crimson and Eastern Rosellas came in for a feed on the seed brick each day , explored and verified my new wire mesh sparrow trap design between the 24th December last and the end of February.

They all had a good rinse and a wash in 100 litres of water for a few minutes before being” relocated”.
They didn’t appear to be very interested in trying to find Penguins or catch fish when they were getting that rinse and wash.

A few decades ago large icebergs were floating up to NZ and close to Aus, both nations considered capturing them as a source of fresh water. From that period they have never been seen again. It seems the warming from that time had soon stopped so Antarctia has cooled for decades with no sign of warming. Einstein would say the single observation would disprove the ‘theory’ of warming. There was slow warming as we all know but it stopped and the alarmists will not tell us why ?

It should be remembered that the only significance of the land ice is that it is the prime source of water needed to raise sea levels, which is the first arising catastrophic consequence of global warming.

“In Antarctica, another paper published last week showed that the retreat of 90% of the Peninsula’s glaciers since 1940 is mostly due to warming of the oceans, not the air. Previous work has shown the collapse of parts of the giant Antarctic ice cap may already be unstoppable, potentially causing 4 metres of sea level rise in coming centuries.”

Note “coming Centuries” , not the week after next.
2C is no problem anywhere, even the IPCC accepts that extreme weather events are not evident at that range. The W.A Peninsular has been the poster child always, approaching a tipping point, that has invoked the primeval fear of deluge that is part of the human psyche.

Clear, concise, the truth; illustrating once again distortions being used to create panic in the serfs who feed taxes into the machine.

Another fact is that during the last great ice age 25000 years ago, Neanderthal man had been pushed down to the lower part of Spain by the ice and the field over New York was a solid 1500 metres of ice.

An expedition to the North Pole intended to measure the effects of global warming ground to a halt this month when the scientist’s ship got blocked by the ice packs near Murmansk, Russia, reports reveal.

The Arctic’s record is almost perpetual melting and freezing but not totally melting, it only melts totally in Al Gore’s mind, he warned us of 2 times in the past when the Arctic would be ice free, now he avoids making predictions but never admits his errors

Remember the South Polar region as a whole has been cooling since Dec 1978. That’s a long time and if it lasts for another 2 years that will be 40 years or 0.4 of a century.
Of course AGW theory tells us that warming will be enhanced at the poles and in the lower troposphere compared to the surface.
Note also OZ has the fastest cooling trend in the lower trop. See Ken Stewart’s June pause update link.

“…There are few scientists left who believe that atmospheric warming will be the main cause of Antarctic [ice] instability over the next century….Prof Andrew Shepherd

Excellent..great news..I can start to use the shower and washing machine again..I am guessing he might be talking about volcanic..?
Has anyone seen any references to $CAGW$ ™ causing increased volcanic activity ?
Ya know they all love a good sloppy correlation and equate it with causation…
Anyway..its all downhill with the $CAGW$ Virtual Signalling

“There are few scientists left who believe that atmospheric warming will be the main cause of Antarctic [ice] instability over the next century”

I’m not sure what he means with this sentence. Does he mean the edges of the ice sheet will continue to break off producing ice bergs in the same way they have for thousands of years due to natural forces. If so , I wonder how long it took him to come up with that bit of “word twisting”

Ice extent is used as the absolute, self evident proof of run away global warming at the North pole but the average temperature in summer there is 0C and it can reach a record 25C. An average at exactly the point at which ice forms and melts. Highly variable ice extent means almost nothing as tiny year to year variation is quite enough to produce a dramatic change.

However in the -25C colder Antarctica, we just had record ice extent and a great thickening of the ice over a continent twice the size of Australia, enough to stop the sea level rise by 6mm. Surely this is a self evident proof of much colder conditions but it takes a scientist to suggest there might actually be some cooling? Sorry, a temporary and perfectly natural and understandable downward change in the hiatus conditions during continuing rapid global warming.

Sorry, no specific papers. The 6mm drop was my own calculation from NASA’s report last year of the extraordinary amount of extra ice on Antarctica. I based this 6mm on the average 3.4km depth and the 2/3 of the planetary surface. It matched nicely with the reported drop in the sea level rise, confirming what I had thought. People just report things like ice in bigatons and I translate that into sea level based on conservation of water as most water is in the ocean, so ice has to come from the ocean.

The temperature part is just Wikipedia stuff. It is a bit like the whole CO2 equilibrium bit. Hardly worth a paper but no real physical scientist thinks you can unilaterally increase a gas on one side of a gas/water boundary, not when 98% of the gas is already dissolved. The same with the persistence time of CO2 in the air. If people really accepted basic physical chemistry, this whole story would never have started. What continues to puzzle me is that real scientists, serious scientists stay silent, except for a few like standouts Bob Carter and Ian Plimner. Then I am amazed that no one much listens to them, labelled as prejudiced while they listen to someone like roo boy Flannery. My scientist friends just stay out of it, either through lack of interest or to avoid arguments.

However in all your reporting and the comments, the story is forming and I am sure many doubters come here just to find out what real people think and the tide is turning. I just hope we do not get global cooling, by far the more likely scenario. Then would would pray that we could produce global heating as nothing will stop an ice age.

el gordo. From that
“Zwally’s team calculated that the mass gain from the thickening of East Antarctica remained steady from 1992 to 2008 at 200 billion tons per year, while the ice losses from the coastal regions of West Antarctica and the Antarctic Peninsula increased by 65 billion tons per year.”
So it seems logical to conclude either that ice loss is caused by cooling or cooling causes ice loss…right???

I was reading this article when something profound entered my mind.
Could all this global warming just be all the hot air from all the left/politicians/green types being let out all at roughly the same time?

Yes, 14% of that hot air is actually CO2. CO2 in Human breath is 7x the entire output of Australia. Canberra needs to be fitted with windmills driven from Parliament house. Now that would be a truly sustainable constant wind source.

I mean at 3 tons of CO2 per person per year and an extra 5 billion people on the planet in the 20th century, extra human breath would account for perhaps 14% of total CO2 and 28% of the increase in 100 years, if in fact CO2 stayed in the air as people seem to think. That is understandable because few have any idea of gaseous equilibrium with water. The champions for hot CO2 rich air are the Greens who hyperventilate over every hot day, every bushfire and now every storm.

Correct. Those insects are a problem too. In fact all life runs on the CO2 cycle but we know for a fact that humans have grown far faster than CO2 or the temperature, increasing x4 in a century. So it turns out humans are the problem.

You can bet Greens want to save the planet by exterminating every other human, except themselves and their friends and family. As long as they could still buy everything from the supermarket and earn a good living and travel overseas and go skiing and watch TV from other countries and buy cars and phones and tablets made elsewhere and visit countries where people are much poorer but have good beaches. So perhaps only half the population has to go. Then the world would be saved.

How about this for a headline?
Antarctica: Cooling in this region seems to determine a CO2 forcing of -.2 with a 95% CI of (0.0,-0.4).
Other regions of the planet are showing mixed results, but many analyses for the CO2 impacts fall within the same 95% confidence interval.

There has been no net overall warming at the Antarctic since records began in 1957.
This presents a paradox to the theory because of supposed ’polar amplification’: “… the phenomenon that any change in the net radiation balance (for example greenhouse intensification) tends to produce a larger change in temperature near the poles than the planetary average …” (Wiki).
Also the Antarctic as a continent (as opposed to the Arctic which is mostly ocean) is where any warming due to CO2 should be most apparent because: “… atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) has its greatest absorption of infrared radiation (IR) at sub-zero temperatures …” and “… the air is dry due to prevailing low temperatures, allowing CO2 to exert a much greater influence than would be possible in warmer and moister air masses at lower latitudes …” (Climate4you, Polar Temperature).
Recent warming at the Arctic is repeating a similar pattern in the mid-‘30s – early ‘40s.

Manalive, on “polar amplification” — exactly. I would appreciate if people can dig up links to that. I remember it was a core part of their predictions that both poles would warm more than anywhere else. I’ve found one paper breifly confirming that but there must be better more direct ones.

Still remember watching the warmist show of Catalyst on the ABC doing a spruik about the retreating sea ice around Antartica , in the footage shown there were polar bears along the edges of the shore line .
Had to double check on if they were reporting on the Arctic or the Antarctic but it was definately on the Antarctic , so apparently the polar bears have migrated .

They make up a theory and chase after it, but their models are badly flawed and clearly CO2 is not intensifying the STR.

‘Last year, using sophisticated computer climate models in the United States, the scientists ran simulations with only the ”natural” influences on temperature, such as differing levels of solar activity.

‘The model results showed no intensification of the subtropical ridge and no decline in rainfall.

‘But when human influences on the atmosphere were added to the simulations…’

The drug cheats of the Olympics are found out just before the Reo Games
Drug cheats who believed they were so well protected that they were above the run of the mill pack of athletes and could corral gold, fame and fortune with the help of a few key individuals who were quite prepared to do what it takes to establish the athletes under their absolute control as the best in the world.

Now at a remarkably similar timing comes the realisation that the scientific cheats of the IPCC’s climate games, those climate alarmist pimps and pushers of the world of climate science, drunk no doubt on the prospects of personal power, fame and glory and particularly the tax payer’s Gold are being uncovered at an increasing pace.

Their mental and statistical feats of turning scientifically observed “white to black” and “cooling to heating” with a stroke of a computer key thus producing a very large dose of ego enhancing “corrections” by turning ordinary mundane century old observations into a chimera of a confirmation of their own “climate predictions” gave them a drugged like sense of fame and an expectation of fortune by being enriched by cascades of tax payer’s gold and scientific society’s recognition and awards.

All boosted by the kowtowing of the politically powerful to their intellectual prowess and the cascades of gold and awards and recognition that would follow.

And all so simple!

And they would be well covered by those politically powerful disciples of theirs who would provide the cover to prevent any public exposure of their data “adjusting” and data corrupting activities.

Like those drug cheating athletes and their drug pushing controllers, for climate alarmist scientists just hold the critical data very close indeed to your chest indeed and keep it well away from any prying skeptical eyes.
And then just a few key strokes in the right set of statistics and the job is done, the papers are written and published and nobody would be any the wiser.

For drug taking athletes, fame, fortune and gold are the true goals.

For data “adjusting” and data corrupting climate alarmist scientists, the drugs of high recognition by peers, public fame, enhancing of fortune and tax payer gold are the goals.

Fortunately for our world, both for performance drug cheating athletes and drugged on power and influence climate alarmists scientists, there are enough decent honest people in our world who are prepared to stand up to almost intolerable abuse and hate just to show the world and publicise to the world just how corrupt some of [ but definitely not all of ] both athletes and climate alarmists scientists and their controllers really are.

Okay then, how many of you were aware of the building shown at this link ….. AT the South Pole, and occupied on a year round basis. As you look at the images, and the extent of the building and its ancillary equipment, and the telescope, wonder how much the power consumption must be for a place not connected to any grid, especially taking into consideration the climate as shown at this link.

Climate changes . Always has always will . No scientific credentials necessary to figure that out .
Did climate change before humans fired up their BBQ’s and made use of fossil fuels ? I know a tough question but let’s make a giant leap of faith and say yeah .
We know there have been periods where thick ice covered most of earth . Woolly mammoths and all that .
Then we had very warm periods as evident by the remains of furless dino’s and vegetation some of which turned into gasoline for Volvo’s today .
Whatever caused those things to happen before humans used leaf blowers ? Natural climate variables ? Er well possibly … Maybe . Some would say someone’s God perhaps .
Never the less does anyone get upset or have plans to control natural climate variables like the sun or ocean currents ? No most likely not . No need to look completely goofy after all . Early humans adapted or croaked despite all those fireside dance routines .

Apparently the current model of humans (at least some ) want to do a three bears impression and set the temperature just right while spending $ Trillions of
other peoples money pretending to do so .

Even cave dwellers could see the silliness of that . Clearly they were not politicians , bankers , hedge funds or bird blender manufactures .

Yep. It’s called cognitive dissonance – that excruciating pain in their psyche generated by the screeching friction between facts and belief, between the litany of historic and modeled lies and the self-evident truth of the present. There is no escape from the angst except denialism. How ironic is that?

How very different things would have been had they chosen not to betray their societal role as the Fourth Estate to the Fifth Column of the purulent Greens and the megalomaniacal peddlers of the UN eco-globalist 2015 “sustainable development” Marxist agenda. To think of those multiple trillions of dollars so immorally squandered on Green prostitution that affects not one single iota of the natural centennial variation of 0.95C±0.27C that has been thus for the last 8000 years of the Holocene.

But then, as we all know so well here, the Green planet saving charade was always Progressive politics not science. These b’asthards are done so well, they’re cooked to cinders. Time is well past to chuck them into a volcano and leave them to tectonic recycling.

22 Jul: Financial Times: Anjli Raval: India eyes oil demand growth top spot
India’s oil minister has spent the past week in the US courting the world’s biggest energy companies for investment and touting the country’s expanding economy and future resource needs.
It has been an easy sell for Dharmendra Pradhan. “India is on a high-growth trajectory,” he says in Houston, where he has been on an investor roadshow…
India’s economy is expected to grow 7.5 per cent this year and is forecast to overtake Japan as the largest oil consumer after the US and China…
Its demand growth — key for companies looking to invest — will this year outstrip China’s for the first time since Beijing embarked on more than a decade of resource-devouring expansion.
Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s industrialisation programme has piqued the interest of international energy companies keen to invest in refineries, petrol stations and even exploration and production, says Mr Pradhan, even though the oil price is languishing below $50 a barrel.
India’s 1.3bn population still lags behind other emerging market powerhouses in oil consumption per capita, giving it room for rapid growth…
India’s emergence as the centre of oil demand growth is bolstered by a drive to raise manufacturing’s share of the economy to 25 per cent from 18 in 2014. The “make in India” campaign aims to produce 100m factory jobs through the construction of ports, railways and highways as well as microchips and textiles…
Mr Pradhan says India is seeking stronger relationships with global oil exporters such as Saudi Arabia, Iran, Venezuela and Nigeria, and producer companies to guarantee crude supplies…
Russia’s Rosneft and independent oil traders have been eyeing stakes in Essar Oil, which supplies 12 per cent of India’s petroleum products…
India is also trying to develop its own oilfields, which meet less than a quarter of demand. It is in discussions with Schlumberger and Halliburton, the services groups, over enhanced oil recovery deals, Mr Pradhan says.
Seth Kleinman, oil analyst at Citigroup says India will need to work hard to meet its ambitious targets remains a bright spot for the oil industry.
“It’s the best looking emerging market out there.”http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/bacac870-4f46-11e6-8172-e39ecd3b86fc.html

23 Jul: Vice: Alan Hernández: Llamas and alpacas are dying because of an unusually cold winter in the Andes
Hundreds of thousands of alpacas, llamas, and other highland grazers are getting ill, and many of them are dying, because of unusually low temperatures in Peru’s southern Andes.
In Puno, the hardest hit region in the country, local authorities have reported a particularly intense impact — 55,000 deaths — among the alpaca herds that roam the area’s high mountain planes that often top 13,000 feet (4,000 meters).
William Morales Caceres, the head of Puno’s agricultural ministry, said a total of 279,000 alpacas had been “impacted” by sickness or death because of the temperatures that have regularly dropped to 9 degrees Fahrenheit or minus 23 degrees Celsius. He said the figure was 30,000 for llamas (that are less common in the area) and 370,000 for sheep.
The animals that graze in the high Andes — particularly in Peru, Bolivia, and Ecuador — are used to the cold. But this year’s winter has been especially harsh in southern Peru with snow falls continually covering grasslands and freezing creeks…
The first signs of how harsh Peru’s winter would be came even before it officially started in June, and prompted outgoing President Ollanta Humala to declare a state of emergency at the end of May…
The emergency period ran out in mid July, though there is talk that it could be extended…

***(Marti Bonshoms, a forecaster from Peru’s national meteorology service) said that, while unusual, such cold spells in the mountains are not unheard of…
The forecaster insisted that there is no direct evidence of a link between these phenomena and climate change. Morales, the head of Puno’s agricultural authorities, said he does not need scientific studies to be convinced.
“You can feel that the climate is changing,” he said, also pointing to unusually low rainfall this year in the typically humid months of January and February. “It is getting more extreme.”…https://news.vice.com/article/llamas-and-alpacas-are-dying-because-of-an-unusually-cold-winter-in-the-andes

Western Antarctica is cooling because CO2 is a local phenomenon and there are no cars in antarctica, or farmer or factories. As the government of South Australia knows CO2 is stopped by state borders, the only possible reason for paying 1000x the price for energy so the South Australians can live safe from overheating in their own low CO2 environment, even if they cannot now afford air conditioning or mining or factories.

CO2 is also restricted by law to the country of origin. If CO2 was not stopped by National borders, we would be sued by New Zealand as the prevailing Westerlies would take all our CO2 to NZ, forcing them to sue Australia for compensation for warmer winters and extreme events. Windmills too are only needed in rich industrialized countries with plenty of energy. Poor countries do not need them because they are poor, which is their own fault. So Antarctica is doomed scientifically to be colder than the rest of the planet which is warming rapidly. Politicians control CO2 by legislation and carbon taxes. Obviously.

Some CO2 does cross the border between Australia and New Zealand, because it is created in the combustion of Aviation Fuels. However, I believe there is a recprocal agreement between the two countries to wave the associated carbon taxes, hidden away in the fine print of the CER agreement. Of course, I might be wrong.

22 Jul: Scientific American: Former Treasury Chiefs Tell SEC to Crack Down on Climate
Three former Treasury secretaries say firms are not giving investors honest information
By Benjamin Hulac, ClimateWire
In a letter to the SEC, the bipartisan trio of secretaries Henry Paulson (R), Robert Rubin (D) and George Shultz (R) applauded the agency for issuing in 2010 a blueprint to help businesses explain how climate change affects them. But, they said, that measure isn’t enough.
“We recommend that the Commission now move to promote and enforce mandatory and meaningful disclosures of the material effects of climate change on issuers,” they wrote.
Paulson, Rubin and Shultz, all members of climate research group the Risky Business Project, said investors deserve to know how the private sector is preparing for climate change hazards…

The Treasury secretaries’ letter was among dozens submitted to the SEC from industry groups, climate change activists and federal agencies on the final day of the commission’s comment period regarding changes to SEC Regulation S-K.
Before the window shut, powerful business lobbies signaled that they would fight updating some aspects of S-K.
“In recent years, various special interest activists have increasingly pressured public companies to provide more information about topics other than their financial performance, operations, and strategy,” wrote Tom Quaadman of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. “Special interest disclosures risk politicizing the federal securities laws,” he said.
Stephen Comstock, a director at the American Petroleum Institute, said the SEC should not adopt any “prescriptive rules” related to sustainability disclosure.
He, too, suggested that the SEC appears to be acting politically…

21 Jul: ScienceDaily: We’re lucky climate change didn’t happen sooner
Naturally occurring carbon dioxide concentrations gave humankind time to face up to fossil fuels’ impact
Source: Springer
Luckily, the natural atmosphere already contained carbon dioxide, enough that the human-induced changes were relatively small, for a long time. Had these concentrations been even slightly lower, the effects of the emission of harmful greenhouse gases would have been felt much earlier, at a time when humankind was not yet ready or knowledgeable enough to face up to mitigation efforts. This silver lining approach is taken by David Archer of the University of Chicago in the US, in a scenario exercise in Springer’s journal Climatic Change.
The concentration of carbon dioxide molecules in the atmosphere is measured as parts per million of dry air, or ppm. In the climatic past and earlier glacial periods, this level fluctuated between 180 ppm and 260 ppm. Measurements taken of Antarctic sheet ice show that the concentration of naturally occurring carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was already 278 ppm in the 1750s before industrialization started in earnest.
“If the initial atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration were half its actual value, we would currently be experiencing the climate expected for the year 2050,” says Archer, setting out one possible scenario. “If there were only one-tenth as much carbon dioxide in the atmosphere initially, the climate forcing we are experiencing today would have already happened, in the year 1900.”…
Archer: “To the extent that a thorough scientific understanding is also a requisite for making a decision to abandon fossil fuels, the outlook for humanity would have been considerably darker in this altered world than it has turned out in actuality.”https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/07/160721143459.htm

22 Jul: Bloomberg Government: Michael McKenna: Popping the climate bubble
(This column is written by Michael McKenna, president of the lobbying firm MWR Strategies)
In fact, global warming is at or near the top of the approximately no one’s priority list. MWR Strategies has been starting surveys for years by asking people: “What is the most/second most important or pressing issue facing the United States?” In ten years of asking those questions, never have more than 4% of registered (or likely) voters in any single survey have identified environment as one of their top two issues.
Most surveys simply ask respondents to select from a list (“Of the following, which do you think is an important issue facing the United States”) or, worse, ask some variation on “do you think climate change is an important issue?” These questions are not very likely to result in probative, accurate assessments of what respondents really care about, because they limit the choices the respondents can give to those selected by the survey writer…
In a survey conducted last year by Stanford University on behalf of the New York Times, “global warming” was offered as one of 19 possible responses to the most important issue facing the United States. It finished at #19, with just 2% of respondents identifying it as a top issue…
Even when we ask about priorities within the narrow topic of environment (“What are the most pressing environmental issues facing the United States?”), global warming has never been identified as the most pressing environmental issue by more than 25% of respondents in any survey…

MWR Strategies has consistently asked about willingness to pay as an open question…
The responses have become fairly predictable. Mean (average) responses have been as high as $279 (mostly due to true believers answering $10,000 or more); median responses (the important measure in a democracy) have been as high as $60 dollars; and the percentage of respondents who say “zero” or “nothing” has remained pretty consistently just more than 40%.

In our most recent survey, when we asked how much respondents would be willing to pay to address global warming each year, $4 was the median response (and, again, 42% answered “zero”).
The important point is that there is very limited tolerance to pay anything, even absent questions being raised about increasing the size and reach of government or the efficiency of those expenditures.
The climate hustlers know all this. They are hoping you don’t.http://about.bgov.com/blog/popping-climate-bubble/

23 Jul: ABC The Science Show: Soil microbes burp carbon dioxide after drought-breaking rain
An unpredictable source of carbon emissions in areas of sporadic rainfall, is the carbon dioxide released from soil when rain falls after drought. The emissions come from soil microbes, and as Catherine Osborne explains, these critters are very difficult to study…
Interestingly, Catherine notes the structure and emotion of Beethoven’s Sixth Symphony mirrors her work on soils. We hear the London Symphony Players performing Beethoven’s Symphony No.6, the Pastoral Symphony…
Guest: ***Catherine Osborne, Jomar Life Research, Melbourne VIChttp://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/scienceshow/soil-microbes-burp-co2-after-drought-breaking-rain/7652800

“How Australia fails mid-career scientists” on ABC’s Science Show
Starting July 2016
Invited to present an 8-minute piece, “How Australia fails mid-career scientists” by Robyn Williams for The Science Show on ABC Radio National. My accompanying article on the ABC website was then promoted by SBS and Crikey and was viewed 27k times in 5 days…

Beethovens 6th symphony mirrors what? Beethoven loved walking in the country outside Vienna and heading off the the “Dreie Raben” ( three Ravens) pub for a skin full of the local brew.Truly a master of composition of great beauty and power.Miss the grumpy bugger.

3) “The Coupled Feedback Response Analysis Method (CFRAM) is applied to decompose the annual- and zonal-mean vertical temperature response within a transient 1% yr−1 CO2 increase simulation of the NCAR Community Climate System Model, version 4 (CCSM4), into individual radiative and nonradiative climate feedback process contributions. The total transient annual-mean polar warming amplification (amplification factor) at the time of CO2 doubling is +2.12 (2.3) and +0.94 K (1.6) in the Northern and Southern Hemisphere, respectively”. from Taylor et.al., Journal of Climate (2013) Vol. 26, pgs 7025-7043 (see http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/full/10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00696.1 , open access)
4) “The change of mean annual temperature over Greenland and Antarctica is around 4 and 10°C at the end of both simulations, respectively, half of which is reached within the first two to three centuries (Fig. 3). These temperature increases are about a factor 2.2 and 2.9 higher than the global average because of the polar amplification seen in LOVECLIM. Such a polar amplification is a robust characteristic of the climate system but is stronger in LOVECLIM than in most other models. Gregory and Huybrechts (2006) typically found a polar amplification of around 1.5 for a representative suite of IPCC AOGCMs. The higher polar amplification of LOVECLIM combines with its lower climate sensitivity to yield polar temperature changes for a given radiative forcing that are in line with more comprehensive AOGCMs”. from P. Huybrechts, et.al., Surv Geophys (2011) 32: 397 (see http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10712-011-9131-5/fulltext.html , open access)

5) “Our chronology and the resulting aCO2-AT phasing strengthens the hypothesis that there was a close coupling between aCO2 and AT on both orbital and millennial time scales. The aCO2 rise could contribute to much of the AT change during TI, even at its onset, accounting for positive feedbacks and polar amplification (21), which magnify the impact of the relatively weak rCO2 change (Fig. 4) that alone accounts for ~0.6°C of global warming during TI (21). Invoking changes in the strength of the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation is no longer required to explain the lead of AT over aCO2 (22)”. from Parrenin et.al., Science 01 Mar 2013:
Vol. 339, Issue 6123, pp. 1060-1063 (see manuscript version http://epic.awi.de/32547/1/parrenin2013s_accepted_all.pdf ).

My bible says C02 based climate change is bunko. Why isn’t this bible used more often if it is even used at all? It is readily available in a multitude of languages, has absolutely a magnificent cast of contributors and as far as I know no detractors. It is called “The handbook of Chemistry and Physics”. Perhaps it is because you really need to be a technical scientist and a layman cant understand terms like latent heat. So right away that excludes 97% of the pseudo scientists involved in the climate con.